12. Protection of Humpbacks

(from "Chairman's Report of the Twelfth Meeting")


The decline in the catches of humpback whales by the shore stations off the east coast of Australia and the scientific evidence on the decline of the stock of Group IV humpbacks were the background for amendments of Paragraph 6 of the Schedule proposed by the Australian Commissioner and seconded by the South African Commissioner.

The first amendment was designed to close Area IV to humpback whaling for three years and the text was as follows:-

6(2)b. "It is forbidden to use a whale catcher attached to a factory ship for the purpose of killing or attempting to kill humpback whales in the waters south of 40° South Latitude between 70° East Longitude and 130° East Longitude during the years, 1961, 1962 and 1963."

The second amendment aimed to reduce the open season for humpback whaling in Area V from four to three days, the text being as follows:-

6(3)a. "It is forbidden to use a whale catcher attached to a factory ship for the purpose of killing or attempting to kill humpback whales in the waters south of 40° South Latitude between 130° East Longitude and 170° West Longitude during the years 1961, 1962 and 1963, except for three days commencing 20th January in each year."

The third amendment replaced the phrase "in any waters" in Paragraph 6(3) - renumbered as Paragraph 6(3)(b) - by "in any other waters"; the effect being to leave the four days' open season for humpback whaling still in force within Areas I, III and VI (Area II having been closed for some years past).

The three amendments were voted upon separately and all were adopted by majorities of eleven against one, with one abstention. The Japanese Commissioner opposed them on the grounds that they would make it harder for the Netherlands and Norway to return to the Convention; that if these countries remained outside and did not observe the new regulations this would be prejudicial to others which had remained members of the Convention; and finally that if the humpback was to be protected in the Antarctic it should also be protected in that part of its habitat which lay to the north and where it was exploited from land stations. With regard to the latter objection both the Australian and New Zealand Commissioners stated that control measures were in force in their countries and that the effect of these was to reduce catching power.

_